United States v. Banks – Do It For The Caselaw

Holding: The Seventh Circuit affirmed the conviction, ruling that the traffic stop was lawful and the evidence was sufficient to prove the defendant knowingly possessed a firearm.
Vote: Panel decision affirming the district court's judgment.
Practical effect: The decision reinforces that a drug-sniffing dog's alert creates probable cause for a vehicle search even if the search yields no contraband, and that constructive possession can be proven through circumstantial evidence of control.

The Seventh Circuit affirmed the conviction of a felon for possessing a firearm found in his vehicle. The court held that the traffic stop was supported by reasonable suspicion and that the evidence was sufficient to prove constructive possession.

Background

Deangelo Banks was stopped for failing to signal a turn. During the stop, a drug-sniffing dog alerted to narcotics, leading to a search that revealed a handgun hidden behind the center console. Banks was arrested and charged with possessing a firearm while a felon.

The court’s reasoning

The court reviewed the district court’s factual findings for clear error. It found the officer’s testimony credible enough to establish reasonable suspicion for the stop. The court held that the dog’s alert provided probable cause for the search regardless of the absence of drugs. Regarding possession, the court found sufficient circumstantial evidence that Banks constructively possessed the gun, including his registration on the vehicle and his prior statements claiming ownership.

We cannot say on this record that the district court’s assessment of Rosenbery’s testimony was clearly erroneous.

United States v. Banks, 24-2227 (7th Cir. 2026)

What it means going forward

The decision reinforces that a drug-sniffing dog’s alert creates probable cause for a vehicle search even if the search yields no contraband, and that constructive possession can be proven through circumstantial evidence of control.